Tape of nanny is misleading, attorney says (Idiot claims tape is speeded up)

Miami Herald ^ | 10.15.03 | ASHLEY FANTZ

[wimpycat]

I see what you're saying, and I agree to a certain extent, but I don't believe it applies in this situation. From what has been described, you'd have to believe that the video was tampered with to believe she didn't do it. The absence of injuries in and of itself doesn't mean the baby wasn't shaken, dropped or slapped. It's just a question of degree.

You'd have to believe the video was tampered with to believe that what people see on the video isn't what actually happened. As for weird angles, the parents didn't have control over where the nanny stood or sat in relation to the cameras. Any reasonable person who has handled a baby can tell the difference between holding a baby up in the air and jiggling him to make him laugh or smile, and shaking the baby so hard that his head flops back and forth.

I haven't seen the video, but there's a screen capture in the first post that shows that the video is in color, not black and white. And it looks as though every one who has seen it is left in no doubt as to what is going on.

Also, you'd have to be some sort of expert to tamper with security video and not have someone discover that it's been tampered with.

To be fair, though, if I was a juror I'd like to see a video of an entire day, to see the abuse incidents in context along with everything else that happened that day.

From what I've read so far on this case, if the woman didn't abuse the baby, then the video was tampered with; that's the bottom line. And in the absence of compelling evidence to prove tampering, such a defense would not fall within the realm of reasonable doubt, emphasis on the word "reasonable".

[ChemistCat]

It's more the problem of having this evidence played, and replayed, and replayed on television long before a jury is seated, that bothers me. The worst monster can get a fair trial so long as people haven't made up their minds before they witness the trial AND they are smart enough to weigh the evidence AND expert testimony about the evidence.

[Superstev]

this is a special effect.(70's style)

[Superstev]

This nanny is surely innocent, because the tape is shot with missing frsmes.. This makes the tape appear like abuse, but is 100% not. If there was a chance I was wrong I would never post this.

[Superstev]

i know it's been a while since this nanny story and most people don't care about it anymore, but there is an innocent human being behind bars still. I am a video proffesional and can assure you that this tape is not what it seems to be..The attorney may of used the wrong words in describing this tape, but has the right idea. The fact is your perception is not reality, because of missing frames.. If their lies anymore interest in this please let's do something about it. The true horror here is how new technology in the wrong hands is dangerous.